Criticisms (Though I enjoy the BBC immensenly, I feel a counter should be mentioned.)

'unbiased' is becoming more of a popular buzzword that doesn't have roots in reality.

Being unbiased in every way is nearly impossible unless you're the neutral planet from Futurama. We are inherently biased and often led by our emotions. We as a whole, crave an emotional connection, overestimate our ability to predict the future, and the vast majority of situations are too complex and often lack a fraction of the information that is actually required.

To use an example many of us know, let's look at the Israeli/Palestinian conflict reporting. Let's say a supposedly unbiased news source reports "Palestinian suicide bomber blows up Israeli military checkpoint." Just the death toll/injuries/location are given. Nothing else. Now let's say Joe Schmoe reads that and has never heard anything about the conflict. Depending on how the wording is done, or the data presented, he will begin creating biases. If there are any pictures, all bets are off. He will create an emotional connection. Some could argue that even such a short headline is biased in that it doesn't present what led up to this event. The suicide bomber's father was imprisoned and family's home bulldozed by the Israeli military....but that was in response to an observed meeting between his father and a known terrorist who shortly before planned an attack that killed 32 Israelis...but unbeknownst to the Israelis, the father only allowed him inside because when they were young, the known terrorist had saved him from a house fire....and so on and so forth.

Depending on which part of that story is told, depends on which side the majority of people will side with. Even when we try to create unbiased news about events and politics, we often end up creating biases.